A tender process must strictly adhere to statutorily mandated digital auction procedures; failure to do so renders the process illegal. Furthermore, a provisional letter of intent does not constitute a concluded contract, and an authority retains the administrative power to cancel tenders for systemic improvements without infringing upon bidder rights.

JUDGMENT :

MANISH CHOUDHURY, J.

Heard Ms. D. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner; Ms. N. Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, Bodoland Territorial Council [BTC]; and Mr. R.R. Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel, Environment & Forest Department.

2. The instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed to assail a decision conveyed by the respondent no. 2 to the respondent no. 3 vide an Office Letter no. BTC/Forest-27/2025/70 dated 24.12.2025.

3. The facts which are not in dispute, can be exposited at first, in order to appreciate the issues involved in the writ petition. By a Notice Inviting Tender [NIT] dated 25.08.2025, the respondent no. 4 invited sealed tenders with validity period of 180 days for grant of Mineral Concession as per the provisions of the Assam Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2013 in certain specified Minor Mineral Concession areas [Mahals] within the Baksa Forest Division as per the schedule mentioned therein. One of the Mahals in which the Mineral Concession was to be granted by the NIT dated 25.08.2025 was ‘Barnadi Sand Gravel & Stone Mahal No. 11’ for the contract period : 2025-2032. It was informed to the bidders that the NIT contained details of the Minor Mineral Concession area [Mahal] along with the terms and conditions of grant and the same could be procured from the office of the respondent no. 4 during working hours on payment of a sum of Rs. 1,000/- by demand draft of the State Bank of India [SBI] payable in favour of the respondent no. 1.

4. As per the NIT, the last date of submission of sealed tender at the office of the respondent no. 4 was up to 02-00 p.m., 16.09.2025. In response to the NIT dated 25.08.2025, three bidders including the petitioner, submitted their sealed tenders for settlement of the Minor Mineral Concession area, ‘Barnadi Sand Gravel & Stone Mahal No. 11’ [hereinafter also referred to as ‘Barnadi No. 11 Mineral Concession Area’, at places, for easy reference]. The tenders so received were opened and evaluated by a Bid Quotation Committee on 04.10.2025 in the office of the respondent no. 4 under the Chairmanship of the respondent no. 4. After opening of the bids, the Bid Quotation Committee prepared a Comparative Statement and recorded their comments as regards submission of essential documents / certificates, etc., by the respective participant bidder. Upon evaluation, the Bid Quotation Committee found that the petitioner with a tendered amount of Rs. 20,60,000/- emerged as the highest valid bidder [H-1]. The other two participant bidders’ tendered amounts were Rs. 20,58,000/- and Rs. 20,55,550/- respectively. Upon consideration, the Bid Committee decided to approve the bid of the petitioner and to allot Barnadi No. 11 Mineral Concession Area to him after observance of all official formalities.

5. The decision taken by the Bid Quotation Committee stood forwarded to the respondent no. 2 for approval. The respondent no. 2 vide an Office Letter dated 13.11.2025 conveyed to the respondent no. 3 that the Competent Authority in the Bodoland Territorial Counsel [BTC] had approved the highest quoted tender as per the Comparative Statement, that is, the tender of the petitioner for Barnadi No. 11 Mineral Concession Area. Subsequent to the approval, the respondent no. 4 inti